[webteam] XML files for public transports

[Sander Devrieze]

2008/4/14, Robert Martinez <mail at mray.de>:
>  Do you believe in reliability here? letting people use random transport
> servers?

Yes, a random selection from a list of reliable in which all
transports are tested on reliability and meet some minimal
requirements will mean the random selection will not result in the
selction of a low quality transport (as there simple are no low
quality transports on the list!). In statistics this is called a high
mean with little variance.

>  My experience tells me that the user experience is quite dissapointing
> (maybe this is not the case for everyone).
>  It completely depends on the server admins how stable the service is.
>  And more fatal: if a server is "known" to work well it will soon be
> overcrowded and instable :P

Indeed, the idea is to solve this issue.

> > >  Since the setup of a transport means giving away credentials about your
> > > account, you might not want to give those away to a random server so
> > > quickly. You would need to explain users where this data is going to be
> > > stored, this will be confusing.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I don't think most people care. Especially, as the transports in this
> > list are verified by the jabber.org  procedures!! Anyway, it is up to
> > the XMPP client how this should be implemented: instead of randomly
> > selecting a public transport themselves, they also can tease the user
> > with the choice to choose a server from a list.
> >
> >
>  I care. Switching to jabber should not imply to spill around your
> credentials everywhere. We're supposed to make things better :).

But you're not Aunt Tilly! ;-) And there are more Aunt Tillies than
there are Robert Martinez'es, wether you like that or not.

>  Transports as a feature are nice to have, and clearly you _have_ to give
> way your credentials away.
>  But doing it quickly without letting the user know of the implications
> isn't a perfect solution.

btw: I don't see the difference between giving your credentials to a
closed network owner and between giving it to one of the transports on
a list that went through a procedure of trust.

>  If you want to circumvent that you need to explain this _clearly_ (most
> people don't understand the way transports work immediately).

<snip>
>  I don't consider the transports as a true, reliable solution (not with
> those instable small servers out there).
>  So I also don't see the benefit of scripting stuff that won't be a solution
> in the end.

Obviously this will not save the world, but IMO it is one and
relatively easy to implement measure to improve transport experience
for users...so, a small first step to save the world ;-)

>  Honestly, I think this is really a pitty. I like the idea of solving the
> hassle of setting up transports. And the XML file seems like a nice way to
> include the community.
>
>  But, say, do you rally have a good conscience sending people with lots of
> "proprietary buddies" in their list to such a scripted client solution?
> (maybe I'm just a exeption to experience bad quality of service?)

-- 
Mvg, Sander Devrieze.